Where a serious injury applicant has given glaringly inaccurate medical histories to multiple practitioners, a primary judge may reason from those inaccuracies to a conclusion that the applicant's reliability as a witness has been substantially undermined, and may on that basis place little weight on corroborative lay evidence that depends on the applicant's own presentation and statements. The duty to give adequate reasons in a serious injury application is satisfied where the reasons are responsive to the issues raised and enable the losing party to understand why the application was dismissed, even if the reasons are concise.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 16 later cases that cite this judgment.